Search results

The purpose of this paper is to reveal the bibliometric characteristics of highly cited articles in Malaria research for the period of 1991-2015.

The data of highly cited articles for the period of 1991 to 2015 were extracted from the Science Citation Index Expended of Web of Science. The keyword “Malaria” was used as topic term to search documents that contained this word in the title or keyword or abstract of the documents that published in 1991 to 2015. A total of 1,614 articles having TC₂₀₁₅ = 100 were retrieved as highly cited articles for further analysis, and Microsoft excel was used for the analysis purpose.

A total of 1,614 of highly cited articles were published in the 230 journals for the period of 1991 to 2015, and majority of the articles were appeared in journals that have top impact factor. The articles published in the 2011s have greater average citations and authors per article. Six journals have produced almost a quarter of highly cited articles and remaining articles were published in 224 journals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA was the most productive journal with 154 articles, which accounts for 9.53 per cent of the total articles, followed by Lancet (110; 6.81 per cent). We found degree collaboration value of 0.971 for the articles, which indicates the clear dominance of multiple authors in publication of highly cited articles in Malaria research. In this study, new indictor called P index was applied for the evaluation of the author’s productivity. As per the p-value, the White, NJ has emerged as the most productive author with the p-value of 0.41 (61 articles), followed by Marsh, K (p = 0.33), Nosten, F (p = 0.32) and Snow, RW (p = 0.31). The USA and the UK were the most productive countries. The article entitled as “Global and regional burden of disease and risk factors, 2001: systematic analysis of population health data” contributed by Lopez et al. (2006) was the most cited article with 2,245 citations in 2015.

The data for the present study was limited to the publications that indexed in Science Citation index Expended of Web of Science.

This paper would be useful to the researchers to know the trends and achievements in the Malaria research and also to the library and information science professionals in collection building process.

This paper seeks to investigate the use of engineering conference papers by examining where the papers presented at the Stapp Car Crash Conference from 1980‐2005 were subsequently cited. Also, to examine whether the references were made to the conference paper or to the individual, the SAE Technical Paper, the second publication method. It also aims to study whether the citations were made to the lead author or secondary authors.

The individual papers were searched in Science Citation Index on the Web of Science platform using the “Cited author” search and the appropriate work(s) were selected using the “Cited work” information. The number of citations to each paper was recorded and the bibliographic information from the citing articles for the “top cited” articles were retrieved and examined to determine the subject focus of the citing journals.

Almost two‐thirds of the papers from the Stapp Car Crash Conference were cited at least once, mirroring that of engineering journal articles. These citations appear in journals representing a wide variety of disciplines besides engineering including journals covering “clinical neurology”, “orthopedics”, “rehabilitation” and “surgery”. The majority of citations (92 per cent) were found to be to the lead author and approximately 85 per cent were cited as papers within the conference proceedings with the remaining papers cited as individual technical papers.

The results on the impact and use of engineering conference papers, especially the results in terms of author and material type, will provide valuable insight into this literature, providing librarians and researchers with a better understanding of their use in the advancement of research and scholarship.

The two most used citation impact indicators in the assessment of scientific journals are, nowadays, the impact factor and the h-index. However, both indicators are not field normalized (vary heavily depending on the scientific category). Furthermore, the impact factor is not robust to the presence of articles with a large number of citations, while the h-index depends on the journal size. These limitations are very important when comparing journals of different sizes and categories. The purpose of this paper is to propose an alternative citation impact indicator, based on the percentage of highly cited articles in the journal.

This alternative indicator is empirically compared with the impact factor and the h-index, considering different time windows and citation percentiles (levels of citation for considering an article as highly cited compared to others in the same year and category). The authors use four journal categories (Clarivate Analytics Web of Science) which are quite different according to the publication profiles and citation levels (Information Science & Library Science, Operations Research & Management Science, Ophthalmology, and Physics Condensed Matter).

After analyzing 20 different indicators, depending on the citation percentile and the time window in which citations are counted, the indicator that seems to best homogenize the categories is the one that considers a time window of two years and a citation level of 10 percent.

The percentage of highly cited articles in a journal is field normalized (comparable between scientific categories), independent of the journal size and also robust to the presence of articles with a high number of citations.

The purpose of this paper is to present a narrative review of studies on the citing behavior of scientists, covering mainly research published in the last 15 years. Based on the results of these studies, the paper seeks to answer the question of the extent to which scientists are motivated to cite a publication not only to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of scientific peers, but also for other, possibly non‐scientific, reasons.

The review covers research published from the early 1960s up to mid‐2005 (approximately 30 studies on citing behavior‐reporting results in about 40 publications).

The general tendency of the results of the empirical studies makes it clear that citing behavior is not motivated solely by the wish to acknowledge intellectual and cognitive influences of colleague scientists, since the individual studies reveal also other, in part non‐scientific, factors that play a part in the decision to cite. However, the results of the studies must also be deemed scarcely reliable: the studies vary widely in design, and their results can hardly be replicated. Many of the studies have methodological weaknesses. Furthermore, there is evidence that the different motivations of citers are “not so different or ‘randomly given’ to such an extent that the phenomenon of citation would lose its role as a reliable measure of impact”.

Given the increasing importance of evaluative bibliometrics in the world of scholarship, the question “What do citation counts measure?” is a particularly relevant and topical issue.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the highly cited articles published in Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ), since its inception, to answer three research questions: first, how have scholarly articles published in AAAJ developed? second, what are the focus areas and characteristics of articles in AAAJ, and who are the influential authors? third, who are the emerging next generation scholars and what are the emerging research themes in AAAJ?

A structured literature review (SLR) was used to analyse 126 most cited classic AAAJ articles and 21 additional emerging articles published between 1988 and 2016. Traditional literature reviews can have varied results because of a lack of rigour. The SLR method allows for an examination in detail of the articles, authors, focus areas and pattern of AAAJ publishing over three decades.

The findings show increased diversity in more recent years in theories, methods, origins, focus areas, and where AAAJ articles are cited, which highlights that the interdisciplinary accounting research project is maturing and remaining true to the ideal of being inclusive.

Within this diversity, the analyses show that AAAJ remains focussed on and presents opportunities for impactful accounting research related to social issues, including non-financial corporate reporting/disclosure, public sector accounting, corporate governance and alternative forms of accounting, audit and accountability. Additionally, there is a need for more practice-based research to address the “wicked” problems at the intersection between accounting and society.

This paper presents accounting researchers with an opportunity to develop insightful and publishable studies. Also, it serves as a basis for developing future research agendas in the interdisciplinary accounting field.

The purpose of this paper is to systematically identify the key intellectual developments of the lean supply chain management (LSCM) field from its very first beginning by analyzing the publications that have been highly cited.

The citation classics method has been used to examine the origins and evolution of the research field. In total, 74 articles have been identified as having the highest impact on LSCM research published from its beginnings to the present day. Key aspects and links among the scientific contributions are studied by descriptive, bibliometric, network and content analysis.

Publication and citation trends, methodologies used, top journals, most influential authors, institutions and countries, collaboration patterns and evolution of the most used keywords are some of the aspects studied. Three main research areas are identified: LSCM foundations and implementation, lean-agile supply chain and performance assessment and the role of sustainability, which offers a holistic view of the field and enables the identification of potential avenues for future research susceptible to contribute to advancing the knowledge on LSCM.

This study provides a useful insight into the development of the LSCM field and can help researchers as it explores the state-of-the-art of LSCM by identifying the most relevant contributions in the area, the main research lines addressed by the scientific community in this topic and opportunities for further research on LSCM for years to come.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the classic characteristics of highly cited articles (HCAs) of top-ranked library and information science (LIS) journals and get acquainted with the high-quality works in specific areas of LIS for distinguishing what gets cited and who the prolific authors are.

The HCAs published across the top four LIS journals were downloaded, coded and a database was developed with basic metadata elements for analysis using bibliometric indicators. Lotka’s Inverse Square Law of Scientific Productivity was applied to assess the author’s productivity of HCA. The content analysis method was also used to find out the emerging areas of research that have sought high citations.

Inferences were drawn for the proposed five number of research questions pertaining to individual productivity, collaboration patterns country and institutional productivity, impactful areas of research. The Netherland found to be the potential player among all the affiliating countries of authors and Loet Leydesdorff tops the list among the prolific authors. It is observed that Lotka’s Classical Law also fits the HCA data set in LIS. “Research impact measurement and research collaboration,” “Social networking” and “Research metrics and citation-based studies” are found to be the emerging areas of LIS research.

Researchers may find a way what gets cited in specific areas of LIS literature and why along with who are the prolific authors.

This study is important from the perspective of the growing research field of the LIS discipline to identify the papers that have influenced others papers as per citation count, spot the active and more impactful topics in LIS research.

The purpose of this paper is to present a quantitative analysis of the Library and Information Science (LIS) scholarly literature published worldwide.

The ISI Web of Science database was used as a source for extracting the data of published documents during the period 2003–2017. The analysis of the published literature was based on the following indicators: research productivity of each county, annual publications, annual citations, highly cited articles, highly cited LIS journals, most productive institutions in the field of LIS and most prolific authors. The types of documents included in this study were research articles, conference proceeding papers, book reviews and editorials.

The findings revealed that the USA had the highest overall output of LIS scholarly publications. The year 2016 was identified as the most productive year for the number of publications, whereas 2017 was identified as the most productive year for the number of citations. “Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science versus Scopus and Google Scholar” was the most highly cited article. The Journal of Medical Library Association was the most highly cited journal in LIS. Indiana University from the USA was the most productive LIS research institution. Mike Thelwall, from the UK, is identified as the most prolific author in LIS.

The study will be of interest for those researchers, who intend to conduct bibliometric research studies in LIS.

The purpose of the present study is to analyze highly cited articles and global research emphases and trends of law and psychiatry (L&P) research during the period of 1993 to 2012 from the Web of Science (WOS) database. Besides the analysis of highly cited articles to learn about the classic articles and intellectual base of the L&P research domain, an attempt is made to detect research emphases and trends of the study field.

The present study applies quantitative analyses of citations of scientific publications to find highly cited articles and summarizes research hotspots and trends on L&P research articles from WOS during 1993-2012 using statistical analysis of words in titles, KeyWords Plus, author keywords and co-keywords.

The top 21 highly cited articles of research on L&P were found; most of the highly cited papers used survey research to measure patterns of violence of psychiatric patients. This present study identified forensic psychiatry, mental health and criminal offenders were the continuing mainstream topics in the L&P field and risk assessment, risk factors and risk management of violent behavior, legislation for sexual offences, mental health courts, recidivism and expert testimony were recent research emphases and trends of the study field. On the contrary, psychiatric hospitalization, psychiatrist-patient, community and services were not mainstream topics in the study field and were of decreasing importance and popularity in L&P research. Additionally, the topics of violent behavior and risk assessment have developed to a significant subgroup of L&P research. Finally, research emphases and trends in the L&P field were found based on the co-keywords cluster map and density map.

This is the first study to quantify and detect research emphases and trends in L&P from the WOS during 1993-2012, which may provide the groundwork for future studies of the L&P research domain, and offer some important suggestions and implications for professional researchers, specialists, publications’ editors and public policy makers concerned with the domain.

The purpose of this paper is to study the presence of highly cited papers of Nature in social media websites and tools. It also tries to examine the correlation between altmetric and bibliometric indicators.

This descriptive study was carried out using altmetric indicators. The research sample consisted of 1,000 most-cited articles in Nature. In February 2019, the bibliographic information of these articles was extracted from the Scopus database. Then, the titles of all articles were manually searched on Google, and by referring to the article in the journal website and altmetric institution, the data related to social media presence and altmetric score of articles were collected. The data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS.

According to the results of the study, from 1,000 articles, 989 of them (98.9 per cent) were mentioned at least once in different social media websites and tools. The most used altmetric source in highly cited articles was Mendeley (98.9 per cent), followed by Citeulike (79.8 per cent) and Wikipedia (69.4 per cent). Most Tweets, blog posts, Facebook posts, news stories, readers in Mendeley, Citeulike and Connotea and Wikipedia citations belonged to the article titled “Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search”. The highest altmetric score was 3,135 which belonged to this paper. Most tweeters and articles’ readers were from the USA. The membership type of the tweeters was public membership. In terms of fields of study, most readers were PhD students in Agricultural and Biological Sciences. Finally, the results of Spearman’s Correlation revealed positive significant statistical correlation between all altmetric indicators and received citations of highly cited articles (p-value = 0.0001).

The results of this study can help researchers, editors and editorial boards of journals better understand the importance and benefits of using social media and tools to publish articles.

Altmetrics is a relatively new field, and in particular, there are not many studies related to the presence of articles in various social media until now. Accordingly, in this study, a comprehensive altmetric analysis was carried out on 1000 most-cited articles of one of the world's most reliable journals.